Compaq 21.5" LCD Monitor

Looks like ComiCon to me…

No HDMI. Bummer…

VGA only? That’s a bit disappointing…

Not only does it have a 16:9 aspect ratio, but it only has an analog input. What museum were these dragged out of?

Display Port or DVI is pretty much a requirement on any new monitor. If you purchase this, you will regret it.

edit: and with that low viewing angle, you can bet it’s a TN panel. This is what happens when you look at a TN panel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETzIFjQ15dc

Product Website

manuals

Review at Buzzillions

Retrevo stuff

and cnet (buying advice)

Compare at Amazon

Prices and reviews at Google Products

and here’s a forum

I have the Q1859 and not today’s (hp)Q2159 on my kid’s computer, and will say that it is a sharp, good looking display.

As for being VGA only - while it’s not “apples to apples”, ours sits a few feet away from an Acer V223w connected via DVI-D, and the Compaq is the sharper, better looking image.

It’s also a much better looking display than the BenQ FP93G (which was also connected via DVI-D) that it replaced.

Not to say I wouldn’t get HDMI or DVD-D if an option, but if the 21" Q2159 is similar to the 18" Q1859, it’s still a quality display.

Hope this helps.

If you find yourself with a standard definition/proportion monitor and want to compare it to what you would get with this one, you may benefit from a free script I wrote called screencompare. I compared my 17" 4:3 format monitor results to the results of this 21.5" 16:9 format monitor and found that this one’s display would be approx 0.3" taller than my current monitor.

Is this lit by standard fluorescent tubes or LEDs? I ask because my old monitor just went dark, presumably because the tube failed. All the LED indicators react normally to the button presses so I assume the electronics are functional. And I know that it’s not my video card because my computer works on my LCD TV.

I’d prefer an LED monitor. The relatively low 45 watt usage suggests that it may be LED lit. Does anyone know for sure?

Here’s an HD video of Need For Speed Pro Street on this monitor.

Here’s COD MW2 if you like shooting better.

Oh so close, I need both a new computer monitor and a screen to plug my blu-ray into directly…try again woot!

It’s an LCD TN panel.

Excuse my ignorance, but is the difference between VGA and HDMI noticeable? Even slightly noticeable? Is there a reason why HDMI is better than VGA? I’m really wondering… Not being sarcastic at all.

I did a comparison on my 19" Hanns-G monitor. DVI was sharper, but the difference wasn’t huge. I might have noticed the difference more if I did a side-by-side comparison, but I don’t have two identical monitors to try it.

Thanks for the quick reply but… I may be ignorant but doesn’t LCD TN technology have no bearing on what kind of transmissive lighting is used? LCD TN simply indicates how the LCD panel manipulates light as it passes through the LCD layers and polarizers. But it says nothing about the lighting source itself. Most LCD TVs, for example, use fluorescent tubes as the light source. Newer ones use LEDs to save energy (important in laptops), increase longevity and dynamically increase the apparent contrast ratio.

Am I wrong? If I’m correct, does anyone know if this uses LEDs?

Ah, thanks to NightGhost’s link to the manual, I found my answer. Annoyingly, it wasn’t in the specs, but in a back section titled “Material Disposal,” it states:

“This Compaq product contains mercury in the fluorescent lamp in the display LCD that might require special handling
at end-of-life”

Ah, yet another reason to choose LED-lit LCD displays.

I’m impressed that this monitor only uses 45 watts or so. My old 20" LCD monitor (which just died) used about 90 watts max.

Is that the cast of the Tokyo production of We Will Rock You?

I find it interesting that HP LCDs sold through Woot are always debranded yet the Comapq LCDs apparently aren’t.